Re: Kind request: Set release version to "10"

From: Wil Cooley <wcooley nakedape cc>

To: fedora-devel-list redhat com

Subject: Re: Kind request: Set release version to "10"

Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 10:00:07 -0700

On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 09:17, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Axel Thimm (Axel Thimm physik fu-berlin de) said:
> > I'll also go with your suggestion, Rex. I'd call it the "it's written
> > rh10, but it is pronounced Fedora Core 1" idiom ...
>
> Now that's just patently misleading. It's *not* Red Hat Linux 10,
> it's Fedora Core 1. It's a shift in the development model, shifts
> in the goals of the release, and more. Hence, the new name, and
> new version.
Yeah, but the actual collection of RPMs and installer aren't going to be
completely new; in almost cases, they will just be upgrades. Versions
ought apply to file releases, not development models, goals, names, ...,
especially when there won't be a radical break in the actual conventions
used with existing releases. (I.e., package files aren't going to be
forced into 8.3 names or AIX-style names).
Maybe if it were a true fork--a clean break started by a completely
different set of people--resetting the version counter would be
reasonable. But as it is, Fedora Core is still going to be under the
auspices of Red Hat, Inc.--still subject to the good taste that Red Hat,
Inc. has generally shown. For all intents and purposes, it's going to
look like what "Red Hat Linux 10" would have looked like had Fedora not
happened.
Wil
--
Wil Cooley wcooley nakedape cc
Naked Ape Consulting http://nakedape.cc
* * * * Linux, UNIX, Networking and Security Solutions * * * *
* Tired of spam and viruses in your e-mail? Get the *
* Naked Ape Mail Defender! http://nakedape.cc/r/maildefender *

Attachment:
signature.ascDescription: This is a digitally signed message part